ArticleCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2025
Treatment-Specific Risk Scales for Identifying High-Risk Patients With Poor Prognosis in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Cohort Study From the National Neurological Medical Center of China.
Article in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo develop and validate a user-friendly scale for predicting acute-phase adverse outcomes in acute ischemic stroke (AIS), thereby optimizing clinical management.
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled AIS patients within 72 h of onset (excluding thrombectomy), stratified according to thrombolysis status to develop treatment-specific prognostic models. The prognostic scale of AIS acute stage based on treatment stratification (PAIST) was developed using clinical variables, with discharge mRS as the primary endpoint, followed by external validation.
resultsA total of 1971 AIS patients (437 thrombolyzed) were included. Both thrombolysis-specific and non-thrombolysis-specific models incorporated core predictors (baseline NIHSS, deep vein thrombosis, neuron specific enolase, neutrophil percentage) but differed in cut-off values and weightings. Additionally, the non-thrombolysis-specific model integrated three extra variables: age, fasting blood glucose, and serum potassium. External validation demonstrated PAIST outperformed the benchmark model (AUCs: thrombolysis group 0.759 vs. 0.698; non-thrombolysis group 0.850 vs. 0.801; all p ≤ 0.05). PAIST-based risk stratification effectively identified high-risk patients, with poor prognosis rates of 76.92% (thrombolysis group) and 61.11% (non-thrombolysis group).
conclusionThe PAIST scale is an effective and practical tool for acute-phase prognostic risk stratification in AIS. Its treatment-stratified design enables accurate risk assessment, thereby supporting individualized clinical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.